On Jul 27, 3:43 pm, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Ignore inner experiences for the purposes of answering this question.  
> (for now at least)
>
> Assume there is a program which chooses the exactly correct YouTube  
> videos to display in response to any given question, and it chooses  
> the videos so well that not even your best friend could distinguish  
> between it and a live skype call with you.
>
> My question to you is: given the YouTube video responses give the  
> appearence of an intelligent person, does that imply that an  
> intelligent process must be involved?  Or, can something behave  
> intelligently without any intelligent process being involved?

That's what I'm saying, the fact that it would be theoretically
possible to make a YouTube bot like that (it's only a matter of how
long it would have to run well to fool someone. If the YouTuring test
only lasts 20 seconds, it wouldn't be that hard to compete against a
live YouTube) means that appearances of intelligence don't mean
anything other than that's how it appears to a particular observer
using a particular method of observation.

This doesn't mean that the YouTube program isn't a form of
'intelligence' though, just that it's not the intelligence of a person
that can feel and understand. It's inorganic molecular intelligence.
It has a different palette of interesting abilities than we do.

>I liked your contrast of:
>"I AM THAT I AM" to " i = square root of negative one"

Heh, thanks. The hyper proprietary and the hyper generic.

Craig


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to